Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Software - Troubleshooting and Discussion > Applications > Dreamweaver MX 2004

Dreamweaver MX 2004
Thread Tools
Nebrie
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: In my tree making cookies
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 10, 2003, 01:10 AM
 
Macromedia just released Studio MX 2004 to Devnet subscribers.

After playing with Dreamweaver, I'm gonna cry.

"I just hope DW 2004 is a LOT faster"

It is soooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo slow. I've got a new 1ghz imac with 768mb of ram and only one page open in dreamweaver. There's lag in everything. I can only hope Panther speeds things up. Its laggy just from me typing fast. I'd hate to have to buy a dual G5 just to use this, or a 1ghz pc. I hate macromedia.

We need to petition Apple to buy Macromedia.
( Last edited by Nebrie; Sep 10, 2003 at 01:52 AM. )
     
superblue
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tokyo
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 10, 2003, 02:15 AM
 
Surely it can't be even slower than DW MX?
     
Chris Grande
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: CT
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 10, 2003, 02:43 AM
 
I'm trying the trials of Fireworks 2004 and Dreamweaver 2004 right now. For one thing the new UI elements are just flat out ugly. Fireworks MX (not 04) used sheets for save dialogs while 2004 does not, very strange. The new tool icons I think are overly distracting in both apps (thing Acrobat 6 icons). The new version of DW seems very clunky for some reason, while the new version of FW seems a little faster. I'm going to bed...I'll have to work with them a little more in the morning.
     
aladdinsane
Forum Regular
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Mnt View, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 10, 2003, 03:55 AM
 
The main feature I was interesting in, proper Unicode support, is awesome. For non-English users this is a big thing. They had support for a few languages in MX but the MX 2004 has solid Unicode support. That alone is enough for me to buy an upgrade.

And it is faster for sure (well how could it not be )
     
workerbee
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Switzerland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 10, 2003, 05:39 AM
 
Originally posted by aladdinsane:
And it is faster for sure (well how could it not be )
Hmmm... Fireworks MX 2004 seems to be somewhat faster than FWMX.
Dreamweaver MX 2004 OTOH has hardly become faster. Changing between code and design view is certainly slower than it was with DW MX. BBedit Integration seems to be buggy: I got a japanese alert box after switching back from BBedit, and design view of the document was blank until I closed the window and reloaded the document from disc.

Not yet quite as enthusiastic as I expected to be.
MBP 15" 2.33GHz C2D 3GB 2*23" ACD
     
workerbee
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Switzerland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 10, 2003, 06:42 AM
 
Originally posted by Chris Grande:
Fireworks MX (not 04) used sheets for save dialogs while 2004 does not, very strange.
Flash MX 04 now uses sheets, while Flash MX didn't.

Anyone know how much better the Windows versions of the MX 04 apps run?
MBP 15" 2.33GHz C2D 3GB 2*23" ACD
     
ameat
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Manhattan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 10, 2003, 08:25 AM
 
anyone wanna post screenshots?
     
philzilla
Occasionally Useful
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Liverpool, UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 10, 2003, 09:13 AM
 
what about editing the preferences a bit, does that give any speed increase?
  • seriously decrease the maximum number of history steps
  • disable auto tag completion
  • disable code hints
i heard that made the last version a bit faster?
"Have sharp knives. Be creative. Cook to music" ~ maxelson
     
nitram_again
Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 10, 2003, 09:34 AM
 
But DW MX 2004 still doesn't have a tabbed window interface like the PREVIOUS version did in Windows.
_ _ _ _____________ _ _ _
Martin
     
Mediaman_12
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Manchester,UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 10, 2003, 10:29 AM
 
Originally posted by nitram_again:
But DW MX 2004 still doesn't have a tabbed window interface like the PREVIOUS version did in Windows.
Ugh! They have even improved the tab interface in the Windows version (the tabs are now at the top of the pages, IMHO where you expect them to be, instead of the bottom). Does the 2004 Mac version not have the 'multi pane' interface (like the windows version) yet .
I usually hate this style of programme window, but with all the bars & windows Dreamwever has it makes lots of sense.

Oh, and Macromedia said they had improved the CSS support, but unfortunately although the apps CSS handling has improved (example: If you have a CSS doc attached to the Web page the CSS styles appear in the Font style popup) the page preview renders the CSS even worse (pages that work in both IE and Firebird now show incorrectly in DW 2004).
( Last edited by Mediaman_12; Sep 10, 2003 at 10:46 AM. )
     
KidRed
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Florida
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 10, 2003, 11:11 AM
 
Originally posted by Nebrie:
Macromedia just released Studio MX 2004 to Devnet subscribers.

After playing with Dreamweaver, I'm gonna cry.

"I just hope DW 2004 is a LOT faster"

It is soooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo slow. I've got a new 1ghz imac with 768mb of ram and only one page open in dreamweaver. There's lag in everything. I can only hope Panther speeds things up. Its laggy just from me typing fast. I'd hate to have to buy a dual G5 just to use this, or a 1ghz pc. I hate macromedia.

We need to petition Apple to buy Macromedia.
I'm not sure why you think DW is slow. I have a dual gig which by most accounts isn't that much faster then your iMac and yet, I don't think I've ever thought to myself "man, DW is sooo slow, I wish it were fsater."
All Your Signature Are Belong To Us!
     
workerbee
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Switzerland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 10, 2003, 11:27 AM
 
If anyone is having trouble with Macromedia's horrible "Rich Media" Interface (Flash all the way in DevNet and Exchange): try using Mozilla. For some unfathomable reason, Mozilla tells the MM Server that it does not have Flash installed, and it works!. I ended up getting perfectly usable, html-based pages
MBP 15" 2.33GHz C2D 3GB 2*23" ACD
     
Severed Hand of Skywalker
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: The bottom of Cloud City
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 10, 2003, 12:41 PM
 
You can download a working 30 demo but know that it calls home.

"Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh"
     
shortcipher
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Feb 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 10, 2003, 12:48 PM
 
Originally posted by Nebrie:
Macromedia just released Studio MX 2004 to Devnet subscribers.

After playing with Dreamweaver, I'm gonna cry.

"I just hope DW 2004 is a LOT faster"

It is soooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo slow. I've got a new 1ghz imac with 768mb of ram and only one page open in dreamweaver. There's lag in everything. I can only hope Panther speeds things up. Its laggy just from me typing fast. I'd hate to have to buy a dual G5 just to use this, or a 1ghz pc. I hate macromedia.

We need to petition Apple to buy Macromedia.
well I have to admit that after a very slow startup first time around (close that Start Page window!) it seems to run rather nicely, not lag in code editing, and the code hint feature s pretty slick... I do have a dual 1.42 Ghz though...
     
jasong
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Allston, MA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 10, 2003, 02:13 PM
 
I downloaded the DW MX 2004 trial this morning and have found it to be much faster. In everything from loading a new site, to recreating the site cache, to text and table editing on complex pages.

The elements look much better in Graphite than in Blue, and I find the Insert bar to be more useful in Tab mode (like it was in MX). The "Rollover" effect on the interface elements is pretty horrible, but that really is my only complaint.

While I miss the single window mode that windows has, once 10.3 is out with Expose I will be glad to not have it. Also the most important interface deficiency from the Windows version, having the site window in the side bar, has been corrected (and improved on it MX 2004).

I am running this on a PowerBook G4 1Ghz, stock 60 GB Hard Drive and 512MB of RAM.

I'll be buying the Studio MX upgrade soon.

-- Jason
     
Adam Betts
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: North Hollywood, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 10, 2003, 02:16 PM
 
Once again, the mac development team have been completely lazy

I'll check out next version of Adobe Golive when it's out.
     
voodoo
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Salamanca, EspaƱa
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 10, 2003, 02:23 PM
 
Originally posted by Adam Betts:
Once again, the mac development team have been completely lazy

I'll check out next version of Adobe Golive when it's out.
I don't expect the Adobe team to be any less lazy. That hasn't been the trend anyway.
I could take Sean Connery in a fight... I could definitely take him.
     
Adam Betts
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: North Hollywood, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 10, 2003, 02:35 PM
 
Originally posted by voodoo:
I don't expect the Adobe team to be any less lazy. That hasn't been the trend anyway.
At least Golive is better looking than Dreamweaver. Golive's current interface is acceptable while Dreamweaver's interface is beyond silliness.

It's such a shame because Dreamweaver is better than most apps in term of flexibility.
     
Nebrie  (op)
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: In my tree making cookies
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 10, 2003, 03:23 PM
 
Originally posted by KidRed:
I'm not sure why you think DW is slow. I have a dual gig which by most accounts isn't that much faster then your iMac and yet, I don't think I've ever thought to myself "man, DW is sooo slow, I wish it were fsater."
Um, a dual gig is *much* faster than a slower-than-emac-imac. I use dreamweaver at work on a PC which makes the Mac version so much more unbearable.

I'm going PC shopping this afternoon. I'll either come back with a pc or a 1.8 G5.
     
workerbee
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Switzerland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 10, 2003, 04:05 PM
 
Originally posted by Nebrie:
I'll either come back with a pc or a 1.8 G5.
Well, you certainly know what we think about this, um, choice
MBP 15" 2.33GHz C2D 3GB 2*23" ACD
     
KidRed
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Florida
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 10, 2003, 04:39 PM
 
Originally posted by Nebrie:
Um, a dual gig is *much* faster than a slower-than-emac-imac. I use dreamweaver at work on a PC which makes the Mac version so much more unbearable.

I'm going PC shopping this afternoon. I'll either come back with a pc or a 1.8 G5.
So you say my outdated dual gig is much faster then your iMac, I say my dual gig rusn DW with no slow downs and you say you might buy a PC?

I'm missing how PC got into this conversation as I stated my outdated dual gig runs DW quite snappy.
All Your Signature Are Belong To Us!
     
Mac Guru
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 10, 2003, 09:49 PM
 
Once again, the mac development team have been completely lazy

I'll check out next version of Adobe Golive when it's out.
Ok, so while you're struggling with CSS based layouts in GoLive, that as far as I know doesn't do previews as you design based off the CSS, I'll be getting my stuff done fater, with DW's new auto CSS features and accurate CSS Layout/Rendering engine.

GoLive was cool when Adobe wasn't involved.

Mac Guru
     
OptimusG4
Mac Elite
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: columbus, oh
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 11, 2003, 03:22 PM
 
Grr...I deleted the Opera folder and the stupid quickstart pane is blank. Why couldn't they use WebCore for rendering??
"Another classic science-fiction show cancelled before its time" ~ Bender

15.2" PowerBook 1.25GHz, 80GB HD, 768MB RAM, SuperDrive
     
Nebrie  (op)
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: In my tree making cookies
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 11, 2003, 11:05 PM
 
Originally posted by KidRed:
So you say my outdated dual gig is much faster then your iMac, I say my dual gig rusn DW with no slow downs and you say you might buy a PC?

I'm missing how PC got into this conversation as I stated my outdated dual gig runs DW quite snappy.
Please. When I'm typing in DW and there's a lag time before the text shows up on the screen, that's lag. An iMac with 1ghz processor beats two 1ghz G4 processors with globs of cache because it came out first. Uh huh. If you think it's blazing fast, good for you. I use dreamweaver at a PC at work every single day and *that* is blazing. It has something to do with the fact that Macromedia for Windows software is made in the USA whereas Macromedia for Mac software is outsourced to a boneheaded Indian company who probably does work for Quark too.

I bought a PC for my Macromedia work until I can get a dual 3.5ghz G5. This isn't related to your comment but whatever, since you seem to believe your Dual 1ghz G4 powermac is slower than a single 1ghz G4 imac.
     
workerbee
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Switzerland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 12, 2003, 07:28 AM
 
Originally posted by Nebrie:
If you think it's blazing fast, good for you. I use dreamweaver at a PC at work every single day and *that* is blazing. It has something to do with the fact that Macromedia for Windows software is made in the USA whereas Macromedia for Mac software is outsourced to a boneheaded Indian company who probably does work for Quark too.
There's some truth to this, unfortunately. Generally MM apps run a lot faster on windows nowadays. Playing with MX 04 on my TiBook 800 makes me think of buying a Dell sometimes. While DW MX 04 is really neat, and has fantastic stuff especially in the coding window, it is very very slow indeed on OS X. I haven't compared it to a windows PC (yet), but if Director MX (the first MM app that was ported from win to OS X by an indian company AFAIK) is anything to go by, it will hurt to see it. Dir MX on an Athlon 500MHz/256MB RAM/winXP simply runs circles around the same on a TiBook G4 800MHz/1GB RAM/OS X 10.2.

To think that in ye good olde times Macromind (as they were called) were a Mac-only company...
MBP 15" 2.33GHz C2D 3GB 2*23" ACD
     
Mediaman_12
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Manchester,UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 12, 2003, 08:31 AM
 
Originally posted by Mac Guru:
Ok, so while you're struggling with CSS based layouts in GoLive, that as far as I know doesn't do previews as you design based off the CSS, I'll be getting my stuff done fater, with DW's new auto CSS features and accurate CSS Layout/Rendering engine.
It may say in Macromedia's Press release that the CSS rendering is improved, but I don't see it.
Example: www.cedele.com is a site I completed a month or two back, utilising CSS layers for the layout.
GIF Previews.
Dreamweaver MX
IE 6 Windows
Firebird
Dreamweaver MX 2004
How come the newest application renders the CSS layout the worst. Dreamweaver has never been the fastest app even on Window XP it lags, I haven't used the 2004 demo much, but I didn't see an immense improvement
     
workerbee
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Switzerland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 12, 2003, 09:26 AM
 
Originally posted by Mediaman_12:
How come the newest application renders the CSS layout the worst. Dreamweaver has never been the fastest app even on Window XP it lags, I haven't used the 2004 demo much, but I didn't see an immense improvement
Opera 6 does strange things to your site. I've had (and still have) problems with floats in Opera 6. Maybe DW is using Opera 6 as a rendering engine?
MBP 15" 2.33GHz C2D 3GB 2*23" ACD
     
Axo1ot1
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: New York City
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 12, 2003, 11:49 AM
 
I've been using the 30 day trial of Dreamweaver. I have to say that there are a lot of things that annoy me about it, so its hard to see past that and recognize that many of the things that annoyed me about MX are not issues any longer. I think the new things that are annoying me are just changes to the interface, and that once I get used to how it is laid out I will like it more and more.
     
OptimusG4
Mac Elite
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: columbus, oh
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 12, 2003, 11:52 AM
 
Originally posted by workerbee:
Opera 6 does strange things to your site. I've had (and still have) problems with floats in Opera 6. Maybe DW is using Opera 6 as a rendering engine?
Which sucks since WebCore is out now.
"Another classic science-fiction show cancelled before its time" ~ Bender

15.2" PowerBook 1.25GHz, 80GB HD, 768MB RAM, SuperDrive
     
workerbee
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Switzerland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 12, 2003, 02:57 PM
 
Originally posted by Axo1ot1:
I think the new things that are annoying me are just changes to the interface, and that once I get used to how it is laid out I will like it more and more.
That's what I thought, as well; there is a lot be be liked in it. But the speed issue will not go away, I fear: I'm currently trying a little css-based page that has almost no text in it so far, 6 divs, no graphics whatsoever. Switching between the html window and the css window is really veeery slow; everything is jerky, updating a window's icons takes forever... it feels like OSX Public Beta. I won't be able to stand this long, I guess... it's probably back to DW MX then.

Edit: DW has just crashed on me, wiping 1/2 hours worth of work out. Editing css-based designs would be rather nice in DW, if it was stable and at least a little bit faster. That Dell is certainly beginning to look attractive.
( Last edited by workerbee; Sep 12, 2003 at 03:49 PM. )
MBP 15" 2.33GHz C2D 3GB 2*23" ACD
     
KidRed
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Florida
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 12, 2003, 04:38 PM
 
Originally posted by Nebrie:
Please. When I'm typing in DW and there's a lag time before the text shows up on the screen, that's lag. An iMac with 1ghz processor beats two 1ghz G4 processors with globs of cache because it came out first. Uh huh. If you think it's blazing fast, good for you. I use dreamweaver at a PC at work every single day and *that* is blazing. It has something to do with the fact that Macromedia for Windows software is made in the USA whereas Macromedia for Mac software is outsourced to a boneheaded Indian company who probably does work for Quark too.

I bought a PC for my Macromedia work until I can get a dual 3.5ghz G5. This isn't related to your comment but whatever, since you seem to believe your Dual 1ghz G4 powermac is slower than a single 1ghz G4 imac.
Exactly. I'm showing you that DW may be slow for ytou and YOUR machine, that doesn't make DW slow for everyone else. I have no speed issues. That means, hey, maybe when you upgrade you won't complain about speed issues.

So I've played with DW 2004 for a bit now, am I to assume we are stuck with the insert palette being in horizontal mode? That sucks. I like the vertical palette, like PS, like Illustrator, like Flash, like Fireworks, like, well, EVERY OTHER FRICKING APP OUT THERE. I hate having my window flush with the left side of the screen. Is there no way to make the palette vertical? Also, what's up with the huge Chimera style aqua buttons for code/layout view?

Still decidng if it's worth the $200 upgrade.
All Your Signature Are Belong To Us!
     
pixelhead11
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Sep 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2003, 08:52 PM
 
Originally posted by KidRed:
Exactly. I'm showing you that DW may be slow for ytou and YOUR machine, that doesn't make DW slow for everyone else. I have no speed issues. That means, hey, maybe when you upgrade you won't complain about speed issues.
Well

I am running DW MX 2004 on a G5 1.8 with 2.5 gigs of ram and this app is so slow. It also crashes all the time. I wonder if Macromedia even got a G5 Development machine before releasing the POS application.

I am at my witts end with this. GoLive writes such crappy code and now DW MX and MX 2004 run so slow on the G5. Looks like iI am going to check into freeway pro.
     
MojoRising022
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2003, 09:11 PM
 
Dreamweaver MX 2004 is no faster than MX, perhaps even slower. App startup time is just horrendous (possibly as a result of the anti-piracy measures) and responsiveness is almost comical. DWMX04's stability is a huge issue, though....in less than a week, DWMX04 has crashed more than all previous versions combined (and I am on a G4) over 4 years.

The windows version is a dog compared to other windows apps, but is still much faster than its mac counterpart.

On a related note, I don't see much of an improvement in Flash or Fireworks either. There is no substitute for the MX Studio's functionality, but they are poorly coded at best.
     
Synotic
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2003, 10:13 PM
 
Originally posted by OptimusG4:
Which sucks since WebCore is out now.
WebCore isn't an editing engine. Only a rendering engine.
     
alex_kac
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Central Texas
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2003, 10:46 PM
 
Hm. I use DW MX and just downloaded 2004 to see if it would fix the issues that bug the crap out of me and just work better. Unfortunately, even on my Dual 1.25 Ghz Mac with 1.25 GB of RAM its painfully slow. I could probably run it in VPC faster. So unfortunately, I will not be buying this upgrade at this time - not until they show some speed improvements or I don't notice it on my new dual G5.
     
RGB
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: College in the Land of Oz
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2003, 01:14 AM
 
I'm surprised to be hearing this. From my experience, editing code and switching views in GoLive has been PAINFULLY slow, while typing code in Dreamweaver has been instantaneous, with no lag whatsoever. Weird.
     
zazou
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Montana USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2003, 02:35 AM
 
I find it a little troubling....

It certainly isn't a speedster... never was. I was hoping for more of a boost. ( using a DP533....hope a new 1GHZ+ AlBook will help)

I can hope 10.3 peps is up and that perhaps the demo is not a final build (debug code, snicker snicker)

Still... there just isn't anything better. It may be slow to update and Beach Ball on me more than I'd like...but it does all the things I use it for faster than I could if I were hand coding it...SIte Management, global F&R, etc

I do have to wonder about the Opera Render Engine, though. It does not seem to get much attention on the Mac. MM threw a bunch of money for the Opera group for the engine... and they may in fact be a little ticked-off that Apple now has WebCore for free. I am certain that WebCore would speed it up a fair bit....just look at Hydra!

T


Haven't you noticed? Chronic cynicism takes no skills, little energy, no education, and if you do it really well in poorly-lit coffee-houses, it gets you laid.
     
workerbee
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Switzerland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2003, 05:38 AM
 
Originally posted by zazou:
I was hoping for more of a boost. ( using a DP533....hope a new 1GHZ+ AlBook will help)
It won't.
If I hadn't fallen for the DevNet scam, I'd be returning Studio MX 04 right now. MX 04 is quite unusable on OSX, ridden with bugs, unstable, and slower than if it was written in Java -- as MojoRising wrote earlier: responsiveness is almost comical. (Haha...)
MBP 15" 2.33GHz C2D 3GB 2*23" ACD
     
-Q-
Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Atlanta, GA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2003, 01:38 PM
 
Originally posted by MojoRising022:
(possibly as a result of the anti-piracy measures)
What exactly are these measures (I thought I read something about product activation, but I've been out of town and out of touch for a week)? I refuse to buy a product that has product activation or in any way phones home.
     
MojoRising022
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2003, 01:58 PM
 
Other than product activation, which requires you to enter a serial number and validate it by connecting to Macromedia's servers, the new MX applications.

Past that, at launch, it looks like the applications look on the local network to see if any other copies of the softare with the same license are in use. This could conceivable slow down launch time. See http://www.macromedia.com/support/licensing/ for details.

The applications also try to connect to the internet if you use the new start screens. A portion of that window's content is downloaded. I don't know if any information is sent
     
workerbee
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Switzerland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2003, 02:26 PM
 
From what I read, the software only phones home once, when you do the product registration. A hidden file that contains some identifying stuff such as CPU/RAM/bla is then written to your disc. On every start of the software, a daemon verifies that the hardware it is running on and the hardware specified in the file correspond.

I just launched DW MX 04 while sniffing all Ports on my AirPort, and no data was sent or received. Opening the "new page" dialog also did not connect anything.

I find the performance and stability issues much more worrying - especially given the update cycles MM has adopted for the Mac, which means it could easily be 6 months from now that DW 7.1 is made available, and maybe usable.
MBP 15" 2.33GHz C2D 3GB 2*23" ACD
     
mikemako
Senior User
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Hollywood, Ca
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2003, 06:02 PM
 
ahh.. perceptions all so different.. how could it be so?

On my computer, Dreamweaver MX 2004 is much more responsive than MX. The uploads are faster, the app is a little better at allowing multiple tasks at once. It is not a HUGE improvment, but it's a noticable and welcome one.

I will upgrade.
( Last edited by mikemako; Sep 19, 2003 at 09:37 PM. )
My Computer: MacBook Pro 2GHz, Mac OS X 10.4.5
     
Mac Guru
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 16, 2003, 12:22 AM
 
Originally posted by Mediaman_12:
It may say in Macromedia's Press release that the CSS rendering is improved, but I don't see it.
Example: www.cedele.com is a site I completed a month or two back, utilising CSS layers for the layout.
GIF Previews.
Dreamweaver MX
IE 6 Windows
Firebird
Dreamweaver MX 2004
How come the newest application renders the CSS layout the worst. Dreamweaver has never been the fastest app even on Window XP it lags, I haven't used the 2004 demo much, but I didn't see an immense improvement
I would have to say something's amiss with your code.

Opening a site designed with 100% compliant CSS and xhtml in Dreamweaver MX and 2004 rendered REMARKABLE results in favor of 2004's CSS engine.

I'm pleased... take a look...

Dreamweaver MX

Dreamweaver MX 2004

Doesn't look bad to me.

Mac Guru
     
KidRed
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Florida
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 16, 2003, 09:01 PM
 
2004 is as fast or faster then MX on my dual gig with 1gig ram. Not sure why some have it slower. Also, 2004 has nice automated CSS coding now, very nice. Still getting used to the table outline measuement ghost thing from hell, but otherwsie not bad. I may be tempted afterall to get this update just for the CSS coding.
All Your Signature Are Belong To Us!
     
zazou
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Montana USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 17, 2003, 12:29 AM
 
Anyone else have the a .css sheet open up by itself while tryng to edit a style from the CSS Style palette?

Also, the scrolling / expand collapse on sync is kind of annoying.

And lastly... switching the Site window (F8) from local to remote/local view does some very weird voodoo. It always seem to re dock itself with the Assets Palette.

A few other puzzling UI behaviors...but, all in all, the upgrade is much better at the core.

Z


Haven't you noticed? Chronic cynicism takes no skills, little energy, no education, and if you do it really well in poorly-lit coffee-houses, it gets you laid.
     
workerbee
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Switzerland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 18, 2003, 04:39 AM
 
Originally posted by zazou:
Anyone else have the a .css sheet open up by itself while tryng to edit a style from the CSS Style palette?
Go to DW MX 04 Preferences -> CSS styles -> uncheck "open css file when modified.
MBP 15" 2.33GHz C2D 3GB 2*23" ACD
     
:dragonflypro:
Senior User
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Kuna, ID USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 18, 2003, 11:40 AM
 
Originally posted by workerbee:
Go to DW MX 04 Preferences -> CSS styles -> uncheck "open css file when modified.
cheers!
     
mishap
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Boston
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 18, 2003, 01:50 PM
 
Originally posted by Mac Guru:
I would have to say something's amiss with your code.

Opening a site designed with 100% compliant CSS and xhtml in Dreamweaver MX and 2004 rendered REMARKABLE results in favor of 2004's CSS engine.

I'm pleased... take a look...

Dreamweaver MX

Dreamweaver MX 2004

Doesn't look bad to me.

Mac Guru

isnt this circular logic to say something is wrong with his code just because the new version of the software renders your code correctly?
     
funkboy
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2001
Location: North Dakota, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 18, 2003, 03:15 PM
 
I have been using Dreamweaver 3, never upgraded to any Mac OS X version of it or Fireworks... and I have to say the new Dreamweaver 2004 seems to be about as fast, if not slower, than Dreamweaver 3 running in Classic... that should not be the case! I'm on an 800MHz G4 iMac.

A bit disappointed... and I kind of wish it could use its own rendering engine, not Opera's. Can I really not trash Opera?

Let's try Fireworks and see how it compares to the Classic version... the Classic version can get really sticky and slow, simply because I'm running it in Classic and it gets palette redraw problems sometimes.

--

Okay, I'm trying Fireworks 2004, and the first thing I notice: the text in the "New" dialog, the numbers where you type in width/height, do not highlight. It doesn't look like they're selected, even though when you start typing it deletes it out.

Okay... looks like it was just some odd cosmetic thing... now it highlights again... but the speed of the program is nothing to write home about. My Classic version still works as fast, and vector path painting is faster in Classic than here. I don't care if it's technically "nicer" on Mac OS X - it's more functional in Classic, so I'll be sticking with Classic. Sorry Macromedia... rewrite this thing. Give it a kick in the pants speed-wise.
( Last edited by funkboy; Sep 18, 2003 at 03:23 PM. )
     
Mediaman_12
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Manchester,UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 18, 2003, 03:59 PM
 
I don't understand the licensing of the Opera page rendering engine? Wouldn't it have been cheaper to use the (100% cross platform, fully standards compliant, with no weird bugs) open source gecko (sp?) engine form the Mozilla project?
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:13 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,